The Fragility of Multi-Treebank Parsing Evaluation

I. Alonso-Alonso, David Vilares, Carlos Gómez-Rodríguez
{"title":"The Fragility of Multi-Treebank Parsing Evaluation","authors":"I. Alonso-Alonso, David Vilares, Carlos Gómez-Rodríguez","doi":"10.48550/arXiv.2209.06699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Treebank selection for parsing evaluation and the spurious effects that might arise from a biased choice have not been explored in detail. This paper studies how evaluating on a single subset of treebanks can lead to weak conclusions. First, we take a few contrasting parsers, and run them on subsets of treebanks proposed in previous work, whose use was justified (or not) on criteria such as typology or data scarcity. Second, we run a large-scale version of this experiment, create vast amounts of random subsets of treebanks, and compare on them many parsers whose scores are available. The results show substantial variability across subsets and that although establishing guidelines for good treebank selection is hard, some inadequate strategies can be easily avoided.","PeriodicalId":91381,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of COLING. International Conference on Computational Linguistics","volume":"58 1","pages":"5345-5359"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of COLING. International Conference on Computational Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.06699","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Treebank selection for parsing evaluation and the spurious effects that might arise from a biased choice have not been explored in detail. This paper studies how evaluating on a single subset of treebanks can lead to weak conclusions. First, we take a few contrasting parsers, and run them on subsets of treebanks proposed in previous work, whose use was justified (or not) on criteria such as typology or data scarcity. Second, we run a large-scale version of this experiment, create vast amounts of random subsets of treebanks, and compare on them many parsers whose scores are available. The results show substantial variability across subsets and that although establishing guidelines for good treebank selection is hard, some inadequate strategies can be easily avoided.
多树库解析求值的脆弱性
分析评估的树库选择和可能由有偏差的选择产生的虚假效果尚未详细探讨。本文研究了对树库的单个子集的评价如何导致弱结论。首先,我们采用一些对比解析器,并在之前工作中提出的树库子集上运行它们,这些子集的使用在类型学或数据稀缺性等标准上是合理的(或不合理的)。其次,我们运行这个实验的大规模版本,创建大量的树库随机子集,并在它们上比较许多可用分数的解析器。结果显示,不同子集之间存在很大的差异,尽管建立良好的树库选择指南很困难,但一些不适当的策略可以很容易地避免。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信